Written By:
notices and features - Date published:
11:01 am, December 11th, 2017 - 56 comments
Categories: Economy, housing, national, same old national -
Tags:
The current rise of populism challenges the way we think about people’s relationship to the economy.We seem to be entering an era of populism, in which leadership in a democracy is based on preferences of the population which do not seem entirely rational nor serving their longer interests. ...
The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.
I want to learn more, is there a link to the source of this data?
Google is your friend.
And if you genuinely want to learn more, here’s a pdf from the oecd…
He doesn’t I suspect – Indiana posts links to extreme libertarian views on tax etc – leaping to the defence of the wealthy.
Somalia has very low tax rates.
Norway has high tax rates.
Exactly – the Libertarian Dream of low tax and small government already exists – it is called the Third World.
Rather than arguing the relative ranking – even being middle of OECD is far too much. Who cares if we are #1 or #20, if we have thousands living in cars and under bridges?? As a very wealthy country, we should have close to zero homelessness.
To help you to go ahead anyway and try and defend the Nats shameful performance, here are some links for you:
The actual OECD report I think (pdf):
https://www.oecd.org/els/family/HC3-1-Homeless-population.pdf
Newshub report of Yale Study, which RWNJ were quick to argue about:
http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/07/nz-s-homelessness-the-worst-in-oecd-by-far.html
NZ Herald examination of NZ homeless claims, which includes National denial arguments for you (e.g. living in a car isn’t really homeless etc – go the Brighter Future!):
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11908336
Are you prepared to defend our levels of inequality, poverty and homelessness ?
It’s complete bullshit as everyone measures homelessness differently.
For example
New Zealand homelessness is defined as
“living situations where people with no other options to acquire safe and secure housing: are without shelter, in temporary accommodation, sharing accommodation with a household or living in uninhabitable housing.”
While Japan which has the lowest level of homelessness only counts those living rough as homeless.
http://www.oecd.org/els/family/HC3-1-Homeless-population.pdf
Yep, UncookedSelachimorpha called it.
Bitch about the ranking against one or two other countries, ignore the actual problem, sleep soundly in your own bed with ne’er a thought about how lucky you are or the hardships of others.
Doesn’t appear to be much hardship these days, you no longer hear about homelessness, for a while it was nothing but wall to wall stories on homelessness.
I give credit where credit is due the COL has done a great job finding homes for everyone, homelessness has obviously been defeated.
“Doesn’t appear to be much hardship these days, you no longer hear about homelessness, ”
Then pay attention.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11955097
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11948898
http://hawaiipublicradio.org/post/asia-minute-homelessness-growing-issue-new-zealand
https://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/344382/tram-incident-sparks-debate-over-homelessness
https://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/music/99065678/wellington-musicians-highlight-frontline-services-for-the-homeless
https://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/99595186/auckland-city-missions-13m-christmas-shortfall
A decade of neglect takes more than a hundred days to solve. Your concern for the homeless is palpable, btw.
“Doesn’t appear to be much hardship these days”
Are you ignorant, foolish or a sociopath?
https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/childrens-commissioner-slams-nz-child-poverty-rates-unacceptable-in-country-like-ours
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/99631572/officials-housing-causes-stark-inequality-between-young-and-old
https://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/345600/aucklanders-already-lining-up-for-xmas-food-parcels
https://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/345690/how-is-a-parent-supposed-to-survive-on-20
http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2017/12/the-cost-of-christmas-for-auckland-s-needy.html
https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/lot-women-in-vulnerable-space-female-homeless-shelter-opens-up-christchurch
http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2017/12/ways-to-help-those-who-are-struggling-at-christmas-time.html
https://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/99590265/salvation-army-report-outlines-new-zealands-most-forgotten-communities
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/99522911/come-and-see-us-vulnerable-new-zealand-communities-feel-forgotten-report-says
He’s all three Ed……an ignorant, foolish sociopath. Trouble is there are thousands of BMs out there.
Ignore, deny, blame – the standard tactics of conservatives when faced with evidence that their ideology harms people:
Stage One: Ignore that the problem exists
Stage Two: If confronted with evidence, deny the validity of the evidence
Stage Three: If the evidence can’t be denied, then blame the victims
You don’t always have to start at stage one, or follow these in strict sequence, start at any point, cycle round as you please, rinse and repeat.
+111
Actually, you forgot Nationals biggest one they kept relying on
Stage Four: Blame the previous Government for the problem, even though all the evidence points to the fact it was caused by your Government policies.
You don’t live in Auckland do you BM. The soup kitchens are still busy, the marae are still full, the hotels are still being used.
And still homeless sleep in cars, doorways, and in parks right across the city.
But BM can turn a blind eye because the corporate media say nothing. What a low cop out.
homelessness exists in our town, people are living in cars because there are virtually no houses available to rent and ones that come up because of the demand and escalating house prices the rents are exorbitant
Someone else prepared to defend our disgraceful levels of inequality and homelessness.
Please watch this before you make any more ill-informed, ignorant comments.
Shame on you.
Do you know that living in a boarding house, a caravan, a cabin or a motorhome
is considered being homeless in NZ?
reference
, did you read the data.
I was reading this PDF.
http://archive.stats.govt.nz/~/media/Statistics/browse-categories/people-and-communities/housing/homelessness-definition/Homelessness-definition-July09.pdf
Pretty broad to be honest.
Did you know that dv’s comment at 1.4.3 addresses those people who are living rough, in emergency accommodation or homeless accommodation?
Did you know that it shows we’re the worst by that definition too?
If not, please learn to read.
Edit: and I can keep duplicating this comment for every single time you try to continue your dishonesty on this issue.
So you didn’t read the OCED data?
Or AOB,s comment re the criteria.
It is Broad BUT it still places our homelessness at the top of the OECD!!!
Did you know that dv’s comment addresses those people who are living rough, in emergency accommodation or homeless accommodation?
Did you know that it shows we’re the worst by that definition too?
If not, please learn to read.
Do you know that a single New Zealander personally having USD 10.2 billion, while in all probability paying very little tax, while many others only have a boarding house, a caravan, a cabin or a motorhome (or much less) for accommodation, is considered absolutely fine by some people?
Maybe by you, BM.
there are people living in cars here in my small town, no houses available and what are charge rents that are way over the top
Hi loretta.
I noticed a couple of comments from you sitting in the pending queue in the ‘back-end’. All first comments from new users drop in there until someone approves them.
All comments you make in future will come straight to the front end.
well i guess if you pitch a tent in a ditch or in a park you are technically not homeless, you are a freedom camper. Right?
So living “in temporary accommodation, sharing accommodation with a household or living in uninhabitable housing” is all fine and dandy by you? As long as you have shelter, then things are okay? That might be a non-progressive right-wing and basically hateful position to take, but most people would say it’s not acceptable.
You, too, could lift your sights if you really wanted them lifted.
Weird the OECD report you link to has NZ still doing worse than countries that have a broader definition of homelessness, including Aus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Latvia, Mexico, Luxembourg, Netherland, Norway, Poland, Sweden, and the USA.
“I want to learn more, …”
There’s a first time for everything I spose.
The Nats’ must be pleased with their efforts – and so must the 46% of New Zealanders who support them (the callous, heartless pricks). OTOH, the ball is now firmly in Labour’s court – I’m sure its champion player, Mr Twyford, is on top of things and look forward to a massive increase in social housing by this time next year.
the 46% of New Zealanders
At the election, 35% of enrolled voters supported National: about 25% of the population.
It’s not great, but it isn’t as bad as 46% implies.
He’s 1269 houses behind schedule…
Yes dear
Really? Erm, no, it turns out you are either ignorant of the policy, or lying about it. Or perhaps you were duped by a third party.*
My bold.
*Care to comment? I’m fascinated by how people start believing lies.
One very relevant recent article on the grand plans to address homelessness by a private building boom, especially in brownfield development in popular areas:
‘”Walker said it seemed Auckland Council tried to be helpful but there appeared to be no penalties for the developers when things went wrong….Council workers have admitted to me that they don’t have the resources to keep up with the building demand. They are well aware of a certain sector in the industry cutting corners, but they’re almost powerless to do anything about it….’
https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/99540064/building-is-booming-but-what-are-neighbours-rights
So it was .76% in 2001, .83% in 2006 (increasing) and 1% in 2013. The 2013 figures no doubt include a number of houses that were destroyed in Christchurch so i am not at all surprised that the number increased.
http://www.otago.ac.nz/news/news/otago613529.html
So by the above numbers, we were still way out in front in 2006 based on the OECD figures.
What will be interesting is the figures in the next census.
An economy that is the top of the OECD and is the envy of the rest of the OECD,
low inflation, low interest rates, high employment rates, New Zealand;s reputation shining overseas, better wages, more benefits for workers, a better Kiwi saver
scheme, awesome work in Christchurch, and two of the best Prime Ministers this country has ever had, bar none. Competence and common sense. Thanks National, you are in my dreams and prayers. The list is endless, National improved NZ one hundred percent in nine short years! Sir John Key and Bill English deserve more than mere medals!! Labour must wish they were them.
Why is it every time I see the name Tanz on the comments section I can’t wait to read her latest feverish homage to the Nats. It makes me feel so good. 😛
Anne
I admire your fortitude and patience.
I’m finding Tanz pretty funny lately, too.
Sort of how the nats are the winningest winners, with the bestest prime ministers, everybody loves them… Ardern must really be a giant-killer, persuading NZ1 to turn their backs on such awesomeness 🙂
Winston Peters was just looking for vengeance against the Nats, and Bill English, for old scores. This is well known. Also, I suspect that National just wouldn’t give him what he wanted, at seven percent support and with no electorate seat, and told him to take his greed elsewhere, even if it meant Opposition for awhile. Good on them, integrity and did not sell their souls for power, unlike some. When Winston gave his speech on the night he anointed Labour, he looked both angry and unconvincing, that’s why I suspect it was National who shunned him.
what a bizarre fantasy world you live in
If true then perhaps the Nats shouldn’t play dirty then there wouldn’t be any old scores to settle.
But, of course, Nats aren’t capable playing any other way as they simply don’t have any honour.
So, why have you and all the other RWNJs been whinging about NZ1st going with Labour instead?
And then there’s the reports that National actually offered more baubles in an attempt to buy Winston and he turned them down. This tends to indicate that the honour and integrity doesn’t lie with National.
No, he looked absolutely fucken exhausted.
Meanwhile, all of the National MPs and a lot of the other RWNJs looked like they were chewing rocks after being denied power.
lol
comedy gold
The graph reported in the Financial Times comes from the OECD, you fucking moron.
If the economy is performing so well how come you right wing trash have to shit on homeless families?
Tanz
Had a look at the problems schools are having getting teacher in Auckland?
Thanks Natz
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11957620
Re Kiwisave.
The Natz halved the tax rebate. Yep that better Eh
what a tosser
You seem to be channeling the spirit of Fisiani more each day Tanz
National improved NZ one hundred percent in nine short years! Sir John Key and Bill English deserve more than mere medals!!
Pfft, their achievements are vanishingly small when compared to those of dear leader Kim Jong Il of the DPRK:
* The fledgling leader was a genius as an infant, with official North Korean biographies stating that he had learned to walk at just 3 weeks and was talking at 8 weeks.
* As a junior high school pupil in Pyongyang, he corrected and chastised his teachers for their incorrect interpretations of history.* Kim wrote six full operas in two years, “all of which are better than any in the history of music,” according to his official biography.
* He designed the Tower of the Juche Idea, a 170-metre tower in the east bank of the River Taedong in central Pyongyang that is topped by a glowing red flame.
* Kim’s official biography also claims that he wrote 1,500 books during his time at Kim Sung Il University, from where he graduated in 1964.
+111
More static from Planet Key. Couldn’t make out a word of it thankfully.